For tube sound, which is more important: preamp or power amp?


I have always loved the “tube sound” - warmth, midrange, soundstage. Through the years (since about 1975), I have owned many tube and solid state amps and preamps, in various combinations. Presently, I have a tube amp and a solid state preamp. But like most of you, I am thinking of making changes, again.  Not to cloud the discussion, the specific brands are not important.  I also listen to acoustic music, females vocals, love mini monitors, EL34s, NOS tubes, and don’t care that much about bass.  So you can see that my taste fits the tube sound very well. But I have had systems that are too warm, not enough dynamics or details, and fat in the low end, too.

okay, now to the discussion.  To produce the tube sound, which is more important: the preamp or the power amp?  Let’s talk in general, and (if possible? May not be) not tied to one specific piece/brand/model of equipment.  I know there are exceptions to any general rule.  Not sure if it makes a difference to your comments, but I have no phono and am running line stage only.

As an attempt to prevent the conversation as going in a big tangent, let’s assume equality of price/quality. i.e. not comparing a $10k power amps contribution to a system to that of a $1k preamp.  Let’s also assume that the amp (tube or solid state) can drive the speakers just fine, such that compatibility does not limit the decision. And ignore mono blocks versus stereo amp differences.  

two follow ons: I have  the perception that preamps give you more bang for the buck - meaning that it takes less money to get a great tube preamp compared to a great tube amp.  Agree/disagree? And second, I have never owned a tube dac or CD player, and will assume that tubes in either of these is less critical than in a preamp or power amp. Agree/disagree?

i am interested in your thoughts.

Bill
meiatflask
Inna 11-13-2017
...so stop talking nonsense.
Inna, I'll follow up on my earlier response to your contention by speaking with uncharacteristic bluntness. In my opinion, your contention is nonsense.

Regards,
-- Al
 
Inna, I'll follow up on my earlier response to your contention by speaking with uncharacteristic bluntness. In my opinion, your contention is nonsense.
+1
I have had the pleasure to own a fine intergrated SS unit which ran well by itself for many years.  I then paired it with a tube pre-amp and a new dimension of appreciation began.  Then I ran a tube pre-amp along with tube amp.  Then tube pre-amp bi-amped with both tube and SS amp.  My take away from all of this, to answer your question, is the pre-amp had the largest impact on my overall listening pleasure.
Inna, Yes Ralph is a respected tube equipment manufacturer and yes he offers an informed opinion ( something you’ve yet to demonstrate). He is not however an absolute or infallible source. There are other manufacturers of equal status who would provide different opinions, this seems blatantly evident. Nothing is etched in stone, certainly not matters of audio and sound. Inna you’ve yet to give a coherent answer.

Al your bluntness is understood and appropriate, +2.
Charles
For me, in my system, it is tube pre into SS amp.  However, upon listening to a friend's Martin Logan speakers with a SS pre and top notch Audio Research all tube amp, I realized that the other way around can be just as rewarding in the right set-up.  Until hearing that I didn't think electrostatics could get past the somewhat plasticy sound of the mylar diaphragm.  Didn't hear any of that with that tube amp. There was a harmonic completeness that my previous experiences with 'stats had never yielded. Beautiful music and a new healthy appreciation for the musical capabilities of electrostatic speakers.